Don’t weaken the California Public Records Act

U.S. Right to Know opposes AB 700, legislation to weaken the California Public Records Act (CPRA). The legislation, sponsored by California Assemblymember Laura Friedman, would exempt much of the work product of California’s public universities from the CPRA.The CPRA is a crucial tool for journalists and citizens, as well as public interest, consumer, environmental, public health and good government advocates in California and across the country to expose corruption, wrongdoing and abuse of power.We oppose efforts to weaken it, and are concerned that any successful effort to do so could invite others, leading to a slippery slope that could diminish this law in unforeseen ways, at cost to our health, our environment and our democracy.

At California’s public universities, the CPRA is central to efforts to unearth research misconduct and fraud, sexual harassment scandals, financial improprieties and misallocation of funds, government waste, corporate influence in research process, the commercialization of the university, the influence of wealthy donors, and administrative cover-ups of all of the above.If enacted, this legislation will shield such scandals from exposure and accountability, and invite more.

Coalition letter: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Social Compassion in Legislation, Animal Alliance Network, In Defense of Animals, Advancing Law for Animals, Mercy For Animals, New England Anti-Vivisection Society, Progress For Science, Kindred Spirits Care Farm, The Greenbaum Foundation

At California’s public universities, the California Public Records Act is central to efforts to unearthing research misconduct and fraud, sexual harassment, financial improprieties and misallocation of funds, government waste, corporate influence in research process, the commercialization of the university, the influence of wealthy donors, and administrative cover-ups of all of the above. If enacted, AB700 will shield such scandals from exposure and accountability, and invite more.

#MeToo scandals, corporate corruption: examples of how open records laws shine light on information the public has a right to know

Important news stories about sexual misconduct and corporate-influence scandals may not have come to light if legislation to exempt publicly-funded academics from state open records laws passed in California or elsewhere. In one recent case, 30 UCLA employees were found to have violated UC sexual violence and harassment policy based on documents obtained by CPRA, according to reporting in the Daily Cal. See:

In an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times opposing AB700, NYU Journalism Professor Charles Seife described several more examples of sexual harassment cases involving academics, and wrote, “It’s worth noting that many of the universities and other scientific organizations where high-profile cases were exposed are public, taxpayer-funded institutions. That’s not to suggest that private university scientists are less predatory, but at public institutions, researchers are held to account by freedom-of-information laws that allow journalists to compel scientists and their institutions to turn over emails and other records.” See:

Other examples of notable reporting arising from documents obtained via state public records requests involving publicly-funded academics include an investigation into the corporate ties of a scientist who claims pollution is a health benefit, an exposé about N.F.L.’s flawed research on concussions, and the groundbreaking reporting that exposed Coca-Cola’s efforts to spin the story of obesity. See:

Scientist says some pollution is good for you – a disputed claim Trump’s EPA has embraced, by Suzanne Rust, Los Angeles Times, 2/19/2019

N.F.L.’s Flawed Concussion Research and Ties to Tobacco Industry, by Alan Schwarz, Walt Bogdanich and Jacqueline Williams, New York Times, 3/24/2016

Coca-Cola Funds Scientists Who Shift Blame for Obesity Away From Bad Diets, by Anahad O’Connor, New York Times, 8/9/15

Since 2015, an investigation by U.S. Right to Know has uncovered many more examples of how the food and chemical industries rely on publicly-funded academics and universities for their lobby operations and PR campaigns. Documents we obtained from publicly funded academics, using state public records laws, provided the basis for, or the trail to, all of the following stories:

Old emails hold new clues to Coca-Cola and CDC’s controversial relationship, by Jacqueline Howard, CNN, 1/29/19

Two congresswomen want an investigation into CDC’s crooked relationship with Coca-Cola, by Nicole Karlis, Salon, 2/5/19

New emails reveal CDC employees were doing the bidding of Coca-Cola, by Nicole Karlis, Salon, 2/1/19

Coca-Cola tried to influence CDC on research and policy, new report states,by Jesse Chase-Lubitz, Politico, 1/29/19

Science organisations and Coca-Cola’s ‘war’ with the public health community: insights from an internal industry document, by Pepita Barlow, Paulo Serôdio, Gary Ruskin, Martin McKee and David Stuckler, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 3/14/2018

Case-study of emails exchanged between Coca-Cola and the principal investigators of the ISCOLE, by David Stuckler, Gary Ruskin and Martin McKee, Journal of Public Health Policy, 2/18

Investigations based on documents obtained by U.S. Right to Know via state open records laws are ongoing, and many of these documents are now posted in the University of California, San Francisco Chemical Industry Documents and Food Industry Documents archives.

The public deserves the right to know what our public universities and their researchers are doing with our tax dollars, and that right properly extends to inspecting the work of our taxpayer-paid employees, including those who work at public universities.